Judgment :- S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. The Pondicherry Engineering College SC/ST Employees Welfare Association challenges the Notification dated 12. 1998 issued by Pondicherry Engineering College, Pondicherry, questioning the reservation of posts shown in the said Notification in the matter of appointment of the teaching post in different Engineering and other faculties. The learned single Judge having dismissed the Writ Petition, the present Writ Appeal has been preferred by the Association. 2. It will be evident that by Notification dated 12. 1998, applications were invited for appointment to the post of Professor, Assistant Professor and Lecturer of Civil Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Electronics and Communication Engineering, Computer Science and Engineering, Electrical and Electronics Engineering, etc. Out of 14 teaching posts, three posts were shown reserved for OBC, and two each for ST and for SC. The SC candidates were also allowed to apply against ST vacancy and vice-versa. 3. The main plea taken by the appellant-Association is that the Notification does not show as to which post was reserved for Professor or Assistant Professor or Lecturer and, thereby, the Notification is against the constitutional mandate of Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India. 4. We have perused the appeal which is pending since 1998 and the records and heard the learned counsel appearing for the Union Territory of Pondicherry. 5. From the impugned Notification, dated 12. 1998, it will be evident that though the total reservation of posts has been shown, but it has not been shown as to which post of a particular faculty will be reserved for OBC or SC or ST candidates. Without clarifying the reservation for one or other cadre/sub-cadre posts, the totality of the reservation has been shown. 6. The stand taken by the appellant-writ petitioner-Association that the authorities ought to have informed as to which cadre/sub-cadre post(s) is reserved for one or other reserved category, appears to be justified and non-information of the same will render the selection illegal. However, in the present case, as we find that the appellant-Association has preferred the Writ Petition/Writ Appeal and not any individual, the Advertisement/Notification was published on 12. 1998 and that now more than eleven years have passed, if any selection or appointment has been made pursuant to the said Advertisement/Notification, dated 12. 1998, the appointees are not as party-respondent before this Court, we are not going to deliberate on such issue at this belated stage. 1998 and that now more than eleven years have passed, if any selection or appointment has been made pursuant to the said Advertisement/Notification, dated 12. 1998, the appointees are not as party-respondent before this Court, we are not going to deliberate on such issue at this belated stage. We hope and trust that in future, when the authorities publish any such Notification/Advertisement, calling for applications for appointment to different cadre/sub-cadre posts and that too, for different faculties, they must show category-wise reservation against each such cadre/sub-cadre posts of each faculty and not the gist or the totality of the reservation as shown in the present case. 7. The Writ Appeal stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations. No costs.